Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part I (2010) dir. David Yates
Starring: Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson, Rupert Grint, Alan Rickman, Ralph Fiennes

**1/2

By Alan Bacchus

Frequent visitors to this blog might be familiar with my continued frustration with this series. It might be my fault for not paying attention very closely. But with each successive film after the third episode of the series, the narrative plotting, character motivations and general themes have been like a car spinning its wheels.

It’s been six films now and 10 years, and yet I feel no emotional movement or stake in the jeopardy of these characters. In fact, the most surprising disappointment is the lack of character development for the three leads. I mean, hell, we’ve seen them grow up as kids into teenagers, and other than some minor arguments, cat fights and sullen sulking, these characters are as dull and boring as their child counterparts from The Philosopher’s Stone.

But let’s concentrate on this latest film. Lord Voldemort and his ‘Death Eaters’ have asserted their dominance and control over Hogwarts and placed a dark cloud over the entire world (Earth, I guess? Or just London? Or Britain?). Potter, who is still considered the ‘chosen one’ even though he exhibits nary an ounce of ingenuity, inspiration, or even leadership, has fled to safety using a potion that creates multiple identical versions of himself. While in hiding, a wedding takes place, which alerts Voldemort. This causes Harry, Hermione and Ron to flee to London, where they discover more secrets about the maguffin-like Horcruxes.

The Horcruxes have to be destroyed for some reason, which sends Harry, Hermione and Ron on a Tolkien-like quest across rural England. This leads to the Deathly Hallows, another maguffin-like trio of symbols (a wand, a stone and a cloak), which have to be found before Voldemort discovers them.

Of course, this is a silly summary of the plot, but having been confused by the previous films, it’s the only way to write it. In watching these films now, it’s too late to go back and try to understand who knows what and why, where everyone is and why, and who has what potion or instrument of magic required to kill Voldemort or Harry, so it’s best just to enjoy the eye candy.

Deathly Hallows Part I certainly has the best action of the bunch. In fact, we’re never in the stodgy old Hogwarts Castle (indeed that location has certainly run its course). Instead, we’re treated to some car chases and some gun/wand fights. We never really get a good hand-to-hand fight sequence, but I guess the magic of the wand replaces the need for fisticuffs.

The Potter/Hermione/Ron trio is still boring and dull, and the same goes for Voldemort and the baddies. As an aside, why doesn’t Voldemort have a nose? It’s truly grotesque to look at, and not like a cool bad-guy facial scar or other nasty disfigurement. It’s just plain ugly. As such, Voldemort has never been a bad guy to quietly root for or identify with.

SPOILER alert – there is a genuinely sad moment at the end when Dobby, the little troll-like house elf, dies. He's perhaps my favourite character in the whole series. Tear.

Apologies to all Harry Potter fans for this extremely cheeky review. I’m genuinely glad I’m the only one who doesn’t really get it.

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part I is available on Blu-ray and DVD from Warner Home Entertainment.

Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix (2007) dir. David Yates
Starring: Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson, Rupert Grint

**1/2

By Alan Bacchus

No introduction needed. It’s part 5, everyone knows what to expect now. The series is sailing at a competent speed, it’s not slowing down but not going faster either.

Continuing from the 4th film, Harry Potter is still shaken from his encounter with Voldimort – an encounter which saw the death of Cedric Diggory. The film opens, as always, in London in Harry’s regular home. Harry is approached by a couple of evil dementors (remember those cool ghost-creatures from Azkaban?). Harry uses a spell to ward them off, which is illegal in the Wizard world. Potter is put on trial by the Ministry of Magic, but is acquitted thanks to the testimony of Dumbledore. As a result Dumbledore and Potter are blacklisted by the Ministry for spreading accusations about Voldimort’s return. Something’s rotten in the State of Hogwarts…

I’m not a huge Potter fan, I haven’t read the books but have seen each film in the theatres. The series has flatlined for me. The introductory scenes with Potter’s family are quickly becoming sillier and sillier and are not in keeping with the more mature chapters of the series. And I’m still having trouble understanding the rules of the magic in the films. All genre stories establish their own rules. What can the characters do in terms of magic, what are their limits and what are their boundaries? My beef is the ending, when Dumbledore, Voldimort and Sirius Black seem to randomly ‘appear’ in the action when it’s convenient. Where were they, where did they come from? Were they watching the action somewhere and just decided to appear at that right moment? If the characters have the ability to ‘beam’ into any situation, where were they to help Potter in parts II, or II, or IV? And maybe I’m wrong, but the wizards always seem to be inventing spells to fit whatever threats comes at them.

I am continually disappointed with the lack of character development with anyone else but Potter. We haven’t learned anything new about Hermione or Ronald or Malfoy since Part II (which, for me, is the best of the series). There’s supposed to be a burgeoning relationship between Hermione and Ronald, but not an ounce of emotion is brought from either character. And this film even has less action to compensate.

The special effects were great in parts but dull and cartoonish in others. I was disappointed by the centaurs and that giant man-creature in the forest, which looked more Shrek-like than Potter-like. But, as mentioned, the battle of the wands finale was extraordinary, especially in IMAX 3-D. For once the technology enhanced the viewing experience. The last IMAX 3-D film I saw was “Superman Returns” whose 3-D scenes distracted me from the film. Now I can finally see the potential of the medium. Let’s just hope James Cameron can fix that annoying double-image problem with the glasses.

I was pleased to see Slawomir Idziak lensing this film. Idziak was one of Kieslowski’s frequent DOPs. His yellow and green style shows up in places, but it’s his ominous dark greys that dominate the film. It looks great.

I don’t think I was alone in my relative boredom with this film. Midway through, the audience was collectively distracted by some incredibly loud snoring in the theatre. Either the man needed a nap really badly or the series was waning for him too. Consider it an alarm bell for the producers to step it up. Enjoy.